Skip to main content

Cdl. Law Scandal Pales in Comparison to Pope Francis/Barros Scandal

The left-leaning Catholic Crux's headline on December 14, 2015 was:

"How can the Church allow Bernard Law to remain a priest?"

The question that needs to be asked of all leftist Catholics is:

"How can the Church allow Pope Francis to remain a pope?"

The Cardinal Bernard Law scandal pales in comparison to the Francis and Bishop Juan Barros sex abuse scandal.

Crux on December 20, 2017 summarized the Law scandal:

"It was late 2001 when the Boston Globe began running its first stories on the John Geoghan case, a former Boston priest sentenced to prison in 2002 for sexual abuse and killed there less than a year later by another inmate. Records from the Boston archdiocese showed that reports of Geoghan’s behavior had been made to church officials, and despite that, he was transferred to a series of different assignments where he continued to commit acts of abuse."

"Not long afterwards, similar reports surfaced about another Boston priest, Paul Shanley, who was eventually convicted of raping a child and served twelve years in prison from 2005 to 2017. Once again, records showed that the Archdiocese of Boston knew that Shanley had admitted to sexual encounters with boys, yet failed to inform the Diocese of San Bernardino in California, where he had relocated."

"As the scandals unfolded, Law became the public face of an institution in crisis... to sexual abuse cases." []

Here is a summary of the Francis/Barros sex abuse scandal by the Catholic Herald:

Pope Francis first accused the victims of calumny... The Pope then used his in-flight press conference – days later – on the return trip to Rome, to double down on his accusations of calumny, saying he has not received any evidence of Barros’ alleged wrongdoing, and that the victims had never brought their case to him. “You [reporters], in all good will, tell me that there are victims, but I haven’t seen any, because they haven’t come forward,” Pope Francis said."

"...Upon hearing the Pope’s claim, however, the abuse survivor and former member of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, Marie Collins, made it known that she had delivered an 8-page letter to the Pope describing life in the Chilean institute where their abuse took place and detailing Barros’s alleged role in their abuse... Collins claims she delivered the letter in 2015, through the Pope’s own chief adviser on sexual abuse matters (and president of the Commission for the Protection of Minors), Cardinal Seán O’Malley of Boston."

"... An AP story published last Sunday contains lurid particulars. “[W]e were in Karadima’s room,” the story quotes Cruz’s letter, “and Juan Barros – if he wasn’t kissing Karadima – would watch when Karadima would touch us – the minors – and make us kiss him, saying: ‘Put your mouth near mine and stick out your tongue.’ He would stick his out and kiss us with his tongue.” If Pope Francis could read those sentences and forget he had, then there is reason to suspect that he is not in full possession of his faculties."

"...The known facts of this case and others constitutive of Pope Francis’s record in these regards bespeak a style of governance in which the man at the top is more inclined to listen to fellow clerics, than to victims: to believe bishops – ones with skin in the game, to boot – over laity who bring credible allegations of clerical misbehaviour; to trust his own “gut instinct” even when it is informed by the opinion of interested parties, and to compound this imprudence with the self-delusion of self-reliance in these regards; to believe he can manage the crisis of clerical sexual abuse by way of gimmicks like the powerless Commission for the Protection of Minors he set up between 2014 and 2015 before ignoring it and allowing it to expire; to blame underlings and hide behind cavils of law, rather than face the filth in the Church squarely and fight it without ruth or stint."

"... Pope Francis is not only part of the problem, but that he is the problem."[]

The scandal gets worst as La Nova Bussola Quotidiana, on February 6, reported:

"[T]he Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith [all CDF members were appointed by Pope Benedict XVI], had already conducted on Barros and other bishops close to Karadima an investigation that lead them to exempt [bar] them from their offices. But with a letter signed by the Pope [Francis] in January 2015... the request for exemption [barring from office] is blocked and... Barros is promoted [to bishop] of Osorno."
(La Nova Bussola Quotidiana, "Barros, the shock letter that denies the Pope," February 6, 2017, translation from Italian by Google)

Pope Francis overturned the Pope Benedict appointed CDF ruling to bar Juan Barros from the office of bishop and then appointed him bishop of Osorno.

Francis overturned the CDF ruling despite the fact that congregation found credible evidence that Barros covered-up for the predator Karadima.

In another article, La Nova Bussola said " the Barros case is not a isolated episode, it is only the tip of iceberg."
(La Nova Bussola Quotidiana, "In the Church, The Problem is not Pedophilia but Homosexually," February 7, 2017, translation from Italian by

The La Nova article, moreover, reported:

"This factor [the ascendance of the gay lobby to unprecedented power [in Francis's Vatican]] risks undermining a great part of the work of St. John Paul II and Benedict XVI to address the sexual abuse of minors. It explains also the recent stripping of power from the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith which dealt with clerical sexual abuse cases... the sudden dismissal of three priests by Pope Francis (without any reason, an action denounced by then-Prefect Cardinal Gerhard Muller) reduced the number of officials to seven."

Journalist Hilary White, on January 25, reported that Francis "has all but completely dismantled" the "effective" reforms instituted against clerical sex abuse by Benedict:

"Pope Benedict installed effective procedural reforms on clerical sex abuse; Francis... has all but completely dismantled or reversed those changes... Benedict 'had defrocked or suspended more than 800 priests for past sexual abuse between 2009 and 2012'... His reforms specifically included bishops who refused to act against priest-abusers... 'This Pope has removed two to three bishops per month'... These reforms - and - removals - have ceased entirely under Francis."
(Remnant, "Pope Francis Accused of Inaction in Notorious Sex Abuse Cases, January 25, 2017)

Here is a list of how the Law scandal pales in comparison to the Francis/Barros scandal:

-Pope Francis accused the victims of calumny. Law did not.

-Francis said he had not received any evidence about the sex abuse case when a member of his inner circle of nine Cardinals and chief adviser on sex abuse personally deliver a letter of evidence to the Pope. Law never did anything close to this.

-A credible victim alleged that the bishop, Francis had defended, not only covered-up, but kissed the predator priest and watched the sex abuse which in effect is a form of sex abuse. Law never defended any priest who did such things.

-Imagine the outcry that Pope John Paul II would have had if he defended Cardinal Law if a credible victim had alleged that Law had not only covered-up, but kissed the predator priest and watched the sex abuse which in effect is a form of sex abuse.

-Over "1300 Catholics in Osorno [the diocese where Francis appointed Barros to be bishop], along with 30 diocesan priests, and 120 members of the Chilean Parliament sent a letter to Pope Francis urging him to rescind the appointment of Bishop Barros."((Remnant, "Vatican Watch... So Much for Pope's Child Protection Commission," July 12, 2016). Francis called the Barros protesters "dumb." Law never did anything close to this.

-Pope Francis overturned the Pope Benedict XVI appointed CDF sex abuse ruling to bar Juan Barros from the office of bishop and then appointed him bishop of Osorno. Law never did anything close to this.

-Francis "has all but completely dismantled" the "effective" reforms instituted against clerical sex abuse by Benedict. Law never did anything close to this.

The following shows the unbelievable hypocrisy of leftist Catholics in their response to the Pope Francis/Barros scandal as compared to their response to the Cardinal Law scandal:

The leftist National Catholic Reporter, on December 20, 2002 demanded that Cardinal Law resign:

"The anger, frustration and a profound sense of betrayal in this scandal-plagued archdiocese reached a new level Dec. 9 after a week of new sex-abuse revelations as hundreds of demonstrators converged on the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Boston’s South End neighborhood. In the days that followed, more than 50 priests signed a letter calling for Cardinal Bernard Law’s resignation and a reform group adopted resolutions also urging him to resign." []

Even though the Law scandal pales in comparison to the Francis/Barros scandal here is the leftist National Catholic Reporter response. It is shameless and unquestionable naked hypocrisy. But, most of all it is a smokescreen:

"The Maltese archbishop has been sent on a mission that could make or break the legacy of the pope. Archbishop Charles Scicluna bears the heavy burden of deciding whether the pope correctly proclaimed a Chilean bishop innocent of covering up a convicted priest's sex abuses or obstructed justice by shunning evidence of the bishop's guilt.'

"What pope other than Francis could we imagine assigning his own special prosecutor to investigate his own words and actions? Accordingly, it wouldn't be so surprising if Francis' innovative and humble character accepted a censorious verdict and abjectly apologized for his errors."

"... The archbishop's rigorous venture is an awkward trial of its own, the pope having been pressured to be second guessed and the Vatican's special council poised between speaking truth and pleasing the boss. Everyone stands to gain or lose something significant. For the pope, trust hangs in the balance." []

The appointment of Scicluna is another smokescreen and cover up. He is investigating Barros, not Francis. Barros has already been investigated by the CDF and found unfit. We need to call for an independent tribunal to investigate the cover-up by the Pope.

Pray an Our Father now for justice for the victims of sex abuse, for their healing and that the Church drain the swamp of clerical predators and their superiors who cover-up for them.


Aqua said…
Gameplan of a leftist, (political or religious).

1: Gain power by whatever means necessary. Consolidate power by ruthlessly taking advantage of Christian goodwill and mercy. Ruthlessly crush the enemy, and take their place.

2: Commit the dirty deeds of a leftist when in full control of power. Use all available resources to build a wall of secrecy around the activities. Acknowledging the repulsiveness of the program and personal proclivities, secrecy at all costs.

3: Take defensive measures when the wall of secrecy is breached. Accuse the accusers. Project personal offenses onto the “enemy”. It’s their fault. They’re worse. They’re liars. They’re Calumnious.

4: When all the standard defenses are overrun, claim it doesn’t matter. None of it matters. Ignore the upset opponents. Change the subject. Remain calm. Process bewilderment at their emotion. Move along.
Bishop Rene Gracida not only talks the manly talk, he has walked the manly walk. His 64 trips coming and going across the English channel in 1945 were not on a tourist visa, they were on a John 3:16 commission, because every time he flew, and sat in that lonely B-17 tail gunner's cubicle, he laid down his life for his friends. Many many B17 crewmen died after only one or two missions - and once you hit 25 you could come home [see movie MEMPHIS BELLE for the flavor of this hell in the air]. So Bishop Rene was really laying it on the line in line with John 3:16 when he did those missions past 25. It is no solace here and now, as we see the demons and their demonic cohorts in cassocks and papal white flush the church down the perverted pederast homosexual sewer, that the "effeminate . . and men who sleep with men" will not be in God's Kingdom for eternity. Yes, men, God's men, stand up and say to the hirelings, their lovers, and their demons: "I am mad as hell and I am not going to take this anymore.!" Guy McClung, Texas

Popular posts from this blog

"Exorcist Fr. Ripperger is asking everyone to say this Prayer until the Election is Resolved"

A good friend of the Catholic Monitor got this from a group message. She said "exorcist Fr. Chad Ripperger is asking everyone to say this prayer until the election is resolved": Prayer of Command In His Name and by the power of His Cross and Blood, I ask Jesus to bind any evil spirits, forces and powers of the earth, air, fire, or water, of the netherworld and the satanic forces of nature.  By the power of the Holy Spirit and by His authority, I ask Jesus Christ to break any curses, hexes, or spells and send them back to where they came from, if it be His Holy Will.  I beseech Thee Lord Jesus to protect us by pouring Thy Precious Blood on us (my family, etc.), which Thou hast shed for us and I ask Thee to command that any departing spirits leave quietly, without disturbance, and go straight to Thy Cross to dispose of as Thou sees fit.  I ask Thee to bind any demonic interaction, interplay, or communications.  I place N. (Person, place or thing) under the protectio

High-profile Lawyer Barnes: Amy Coney Barrett would be a Disaster

High-profile trial lawyer Robert Barnes who deals in civil, criminal and constitutional law reported on Twitter that Amy Coney Barrett would be a disaster. The Barnes Twitter report shows that Coney Barrett has " sid[ed] with the government on the lockdowns, on uncompensated takings, on excusing First Amendment infringements & Fourth Amendment violations... [and] exclaimed the benefits of Jacobson, the decision that green-lit forced vaccines & carved out an emergency exception to Constitutional protection in "public health" or "emergency" cases used to justify forced sterilizations & detention camps... [and] hid behind precedent... to prohibit pro-life activists from exercising their free speech ." The lawyer directory reports that attorney "Robert Barnes embraces the challenge to defend the little guy and stand up for what is right. This is why he left the prestigious Yale Law School, whom publicly stated their unwill

If Kamala Harris' Father is part White & part Jamaican African and her Mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black?

  Is Joe Biden's running mate really Black? If Kamala Harris' father is part white and part Jamaican African and her mother is Asian-Indian then is she really Black? tries to figure it out: Kamala Harris, Joe Biden's pick to be the Democratic Party's vice-presidential nominee, is the daughter of an Indian immigrant mother and a Jamaican immigrant father. Her father, as I understand it, has ancestors of both European and African origin. [Welcome new Volokh readers. FYI, I've been working on a book on the American Law of Race, with this forthcoming article the first relevant output. My own opinion is that Ms. Harris should be deemed American, period, but there is no such box on government forms, and if you decline to state your race, someone will decide for you… First things first. There is no multiracial or mixed-race category in American law in any jurisdiction. Nor is there an Indian category. So Harris cannot be legally Indian, nor can she b